[Rd] vignettes present in 2 folders or won't work

[Mark van der Loo]

On Sun, Nov 1, 2020 at 10:39 PM Duncan Murdoch <murdoch.duncan using gmail.com>
wrote:

> On 01/11/2020 2:57 p.m., Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> >
> > The closest to a canonical reference for a static vignette is the basic
> blog
> > post by Mark at
> >
> >
> https://www.markvanderloo.eu/yaRb/2019/01/11/add-a-static-pdf-vignette-to-an-r-package/
> >
> > which I follow in a number of packages.
> >
> > Back to the original point by Alexandre: No, I do _not_ think we can do
> > without a double copy of the _pre-made_ pdf ("input") and the
> _resulting_ pdf
> > ("output").
> >
> > That bugs me a little too but I take it as a given as static / pre-made
> > vignettes are non-standard (given lack of any mention in WRE, and the
> pretty
> > obvious violation of the "spirit of the law" of vignette which is after
> all
> > made to run code, not to avoid it). Yet uses for static vignettes are
> pretty
> > valid and here we are with another clear as mud situation.
> >
>
> In many cases such files aren't vignettes.
>
> By definition, packages should contain plain text source code for
> vignettes.  They can contain other PDF files in inst/doc, but if you
> don't include the plain text source, those aren't vignettes.
>
> An exception would be a package that contains the source code but
> doesn't want to require CRAN or other users to run it, because it's too
> time-consuming, or needs obscure resources.  The CRAN policy discusses
> this.
>
> Duncan Murdoch
>
>
It would be nice if the documents in inst/doc were linked to on the CRAN
landing page of a package. I think that documents under inst/doc are a bit
hard to find if package authors do not create (possibly many) links to them
in Rd files or vignettes.

Cheers,
Mark

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]